Do YOU support Trump’s last ditch effort to convince Republican state legislatures to APPOINT pro-Trump Electors?

[Skylar]

If they don't.....then they no longer possess the constitutional authority to select the electors for that election. The people who vote do.

No. The people do not unless the laws say they do. Under the circumstances as outlined by the laws of the state. Which is what we are talking about.

The thing that decides the factors, is the deciding factor.

One, the law says they do.

Two, if the state legislatures can't take back their authority from the people to decide how electors are selected.....then that authority is not longer the State Legislatures for that election. That authority is possessed by the people who voted.

Where is that written, douchebag? The state legislature always has the authority. That's what the Constitution says. You're living in a fantasy land.

The decider.....is the body that possesses the authority. Not the body from which the authority was derived.

Otherwise, by your own argument.....the State Legislatures aren't the deciders, the constitution is. As they derive their authority from the Constitution. And since the authority of the Constitution is derived from the consent of the governed.....its the people from which the constitution derives its authority.

With the people, yet again, being the deciders......by your own logic. And certainly by mine.

You're a true idiot.

Read back through the debate for us both addressing that exact issue.

Catch up, then join us.

You addressed nothing. You proved that your an idiot. Only the legislature has authority to make election law. That's what the Constitution says.

And once they've made those laws, do the State Legislatures have to abide them?

 

[Shelzin]

In either my argument, OR yours......the people are the decider.

I agree. However context is important. And you ignored it.

 

[Lesh]

Nope. The State legislatures can't simply ignore election results. If that were the case, they could simply invalidate any election that could unseat them making any state legislative seat a lifetime appointment. They'd run afoul of dozens of state laws and be overriden by their state courts without profound evidence to back such a move.

And in that case, by your own standard, it would be the state courts making that determination, not the State Legislatures.

Its simply undetermined constitutionally if the State legislatures have the authority to override the election results. If they can, then the justification is irrelevant. They can just decide to do so. They don't need claims of fraud.

If they don't.....then they no longer possess the constitutional authority to select the electors for that election. The people who vote do.

If thius is allowed to happen...elections become meaningless

Democracy is gone

 

[bripat9643]

If they don't.....then they no longer possess the constitutional authority to select the electors for that election. The people who vote do.

No. The people do not unless the laws say they do. Under the circumstances as outlined by the laws of the state. Which is what we are talking about.

The thing that decides the factors, is the deciding factor.

One, the law says they do.

Two, if the state legislatures can't take back their authority from the people to decide how electors are selected.....then that authority is not longer the State Legislatures for that election. That authority is possessed by the people who voted.

Where is that written, douchebag? The state legislature always has the authority. That's what the Constitution says. You're living in a fantasy land.

The decider.....is the body that possesses the authority. Not the body from which the authority was derived.

Otherwise, by your own argument.....the State Legislatures aren't the deciders, the constitution is. As they derive their authority from the Constitution. And since the authority of the Constitution is derived from the consent of the governed.....its the people from which the constitution derives its authority.

With the people, yet again, being the deciders......by your own logic. And certainly by mine.

You're a true idiot.

Read back through the debate for us both addressing that exact issue.

Catch up, then join us.

You addressed nothing. You proved that your an idiot. Only the legislature has authority to make election law. That's what the Constitution says.

And once they've made those laws, do the State Legislatures have to abide them?

They can change the law whenever they like

 

[bripat9643]

Nope. The State legislatures can't simply ignore election results. If that were the case, they could simply invalidate any election that could unseat them making any state legislative seat a lifetime appointment. They'd run afoul of dozens of state laws and be overriden by their state courts without profound evidence to back such a move.

And in that case, by your own standard, it would be the state courts making that determination, not the State Legislatures.

Its simply undetermined constitutionally if the State legislatures have the authority to override the election results. If they can, then the justification is irrelevant. They can just decide to do so. They don't need claims of fraud.

If they don't.....then they no longer possess the constitutional authority to select the electors for that election. The people who vote do.

If thius is allowed to happen...elections become meaningless

Democracy is gone

They already are meaningless.

 

[Skylar]

I wonder what most ordinary Republicans would say and do if Trump were to convince Republican-controlled legislatures (as in Georgia & Michigan) to ignore the statewide popular vote for Biden, dismiss it as fraudulent on the basis of no real court-certified evidence, and appoint Republican Electors to re-elect Trump?

That now seems to be his “Plan C.” In the unlikely and god-awful case that he became President in this way, Trump and his Republican supporters would truly be leading us to Civil War. It would be an historical point marking the degeneration of our democratic traditions, and the transformation of our country into a rightwing “Banana Republic.”

Sad to say, this undemocratic attempt at a “coup” is exactly what Trump seems to be trying to do right now, as outlined clearly in this FOX report. Do YOU support such conduct? Where do our Republican USMBers — especially those claiming to be critical of Trump in some ways — stand on such efforts?

Trump to meet Michigan leaders in bid to block Biden victory

Two Michigan state legislators headed to the White House on Friday as President Donald Trump made an extraordinary and sure-to-be futile attempt to block Joe Biden’s victory in the battleground state and subvert the results of the 2020 presidential election.

www.fox5dc.com

There is an element of abuse of power In it.

Its a demonstration of the

If they don't.....then they no longer possess the constitutional authority to select the electors for that election. The people who vote do.

No. The people do not unless the laws say they do. Under the circumstances as outlined by the laws of the state. Which is what we are talking about.

The thing that decides the factors, is the deciding factor.

One, the law says they do.

Two, if the state legislatures can't take back their authority from the people to decide how electors are selected.....then that authority is not longer the State Legislatures for that election. That authority is possessed by the people who voted.

Where is that written, douchebag? The state legislature always has the authority. That's what the Constitution says. You're living in a fantasy land.

The decider.....is the body that possesses the authority. Not the body from which the authority was derived.

Otherwise, by your own argument.....the State Legislatures aren't the deciders, the constitution is. As they derive their authority from the Constitution. And since the authority of the Constitution is derived from the consent of the governed.....its the people from which the constitution derives its authority.

With the people, yet again, being the deciders......by your own logic. And certainly by mine.

You're a true idiot.

Read back through the debate for us both addressing that exact issue.

Catch up, then join us.

You addressed nothing. You proved that your an idiot. Only the legislature has authority to make election law. That's what the Constitution says.

And once they've made those laws, do the State Legislatures have to abide them?

They can change the law whenever they like

Without the governor of their state signing those bills into laws?

If you genuinely believe so, I have a School House Rock video you enjoy.

 

[Shelzin]

You ready to kill your neighbors over friggin TRUMP?

None of my neighbors would do the things that's happening in the cities. Make absolutely no mistake... This is a rural vs urban fight. Major difference between the two.... Urban people kill each other like crazy. And we don't understand why.

We certainly don't understand why leaders would not only allow, but join in and support citizens killing other citizens within their own jurisdiction. That's just... WTF?

 

[Coyote]

You ready to kill your neighbors over friggin TRUMP?

None of my neighbors would do the things that's happening in the cities. Make absolutely no mistake... This is a rural vs urban fight. Major difference between the two.... Urban people kill each other like crazy. And we don't understand why.

Crowding, stress, poverty.

Besides...in rural areas, we know how to hide the bodies.

 

[Skylar]

Nope. The State legislatures can't simply ignore election results. If that were the case, they could simply invalidate any election that could unseat them making any state legislative seat a lifetime appointment. They'd run afoul of dozens of state laws and be overriden by their state courts without profound evidence to back such a move.

And in that case, by your own standard, it would be the state courts making that determination, not the State Legislatures.

Its simply undetermined constitutionally if the State legislatures have the authority to override the election results. If they can, then the justification is irrelevant. They can just decide to do so. They don't need claims of fraud.

If they don't.....then they no longer possess the constitutional authority to select the electors for that election. The people who vote do.

If thius is allowed to happen...elections become meaningless

Democracy is gone

They already are meaningless.

Nonsense. Our democratic institutions are fine. You just conflate your approval of the outcome with the legitimacy of the process.

Since you don't like the outcome of the election, the election must be 'fake'.

If only reality worked that way.

 

[Skylar]

In either my argument, OR yours......the people are the decider.

I agree. However context is important. And you ignored it.

I disagree. But I've enjoyed our conversation!

 

[Shelzin]

Crowding, stress, poverty.

Besides...in rural areas, we know how to hide the bodies.

True that.

 

[BlindBoo]

But you can't seem to grasp that the State Legislators trump the voting process. Why is that?

Because the Legislators are not above the law. They would have to pass another law to take the binding away from the popular vote. In Michigan the gov. would just veto that bill.

Maybe. For all intents and purposes, probably.

Constitutionally, the authority isn't vested in the State, but the State Legislature specifically. So its as yet constitutionally undetermined if the State Legislatures can just retain their authority and override a vote.

It would almost certainly be wildly illegal on a State level, though.

"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct

All 50 have directed by law to tie the electors to the winner of the popular votes.

 

[Shelzin]

I disagree. But I've enjoyed our conversation!

You were worth more time than I originally gave you credit for. My badd.

 

[Skylar]

But you can't seem to grasp that the State Legislators trump the voting process. Why is that?

Because the Legislators are not above the law. They would have to pass another law to take the binding away from the popular vote. In Michigan the gov. would just veto that bill.

Maybe. For all intents and purposes, probably.

Constitutionally, the authority isn't vested in the State, but the State Legislature specifically. So its as yet constitutionally undetermined if the State Legislatures can just retain their authority and override a vote.

It would almost certainly be wildly illegal on a State level, though.

"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct

All 50 have directed by law to tie the electors to the winner of the popular votes.

Every last one, 50 of 50 times.

 

[Shelzin]

All 50 have directed by law to tie the electors to the winner of the popular votes.

It's also law that it be a fair election I bet. I don't know all the states laws. But that's why it's being talked about isn't it?

 

[Skylar]

I disagree. But I've enjoyed our conversation!

You were worth more time than I originally gave you credit for. My badd.

I could have been a little less flippant in my opening remarks. Ultimately, you had a solid point....under a very specific set of circumstances. But a plausible set of them.

And my first post didn't acknowledge that. My bad!

Until next time!

 

[BlindBoo]

If they don't.....then they no longer possess the constitutional authority to select the electors for that election. The people who vote do.

No. The people do not unless the laws say they do. Under the circumstances as outlined by the laws of the state. Which is what we are talking about.

The thing that decides the factors, is the deciding factor.

One, the law says they do.

Two, if the state legislatures can't take back their authority from the people to decide how electors are selected.....then that authority is not longer the State Legislatures for that election. That authority is possessed by the people who voted.

Where is that written, douchebag? The state legislature always has the authority. That's what the Constitution says. You're living in a fantasy land.

The decider.....is the body that possesses the authority. Not the body from which the authority was derived.

Otherwise, by your own argument.....the State Legislatures aren't the deciders, the constitution is. As they derive their authority from the Constitution. And since the authority of the Constitution is derived from the consent of the governed.....its the people from which the constitution derives its authority.

With the people, yet again, being the deciders......by your own logic. And certainly by mine.

You're a true idiot.

Read back through the debate for us both addressing that exact issue.

Catch up, then join us.

You addressed nothing. You proved that your an idiot. Only the legislature has authority to make election law. That's what the Constitution says.

And once they've made those laws, do the State Legislatures have to abide them?

They can change the law whenever they like

Sure a state can change it's laws. Governors can veto the change. They cannot switch electors after Dec. 8th.

 

[BlindBoo]

All 50 have directed by law to tie the electors to the winner of the popular votes.

It's also law that it be a fair election I bet. I don't know all the states laws. But that's why it's being talked about isn't it?

There is no evidence that it wasn't a fair election. Just talk by a sore loser who seeks revenge by hamstringing the incoming administration. He told us he would do this in 2016 if he lost then too.

 

[Pogo]

Now as an olive branch, I acknowledge that if the State Legislatures CAN take back their authority after the election and simply assign electors in defiance of the will of the electorate, then yes......they would indeed be the deciders.

If they cannot, however.....then the deciders would be the people.

That was commonly done two centuries ago. Except they didn't even bother having an election to nullify, they just had the legislature pick the electors. Apparently that's what Rump would revert us to ---- provided of course they served Numero Uno. If they didn't it would be "fraud".

 

[Pogo]

If they don't.....then they no longer possess the constitutional authority to select the electors for that election. The people who vote do.

No. The people do not unless the laws say they do. Under the circumstances as outlined by the laws of the state. Which is what we are talking about.

The thing that decides the factors, is the deciding factor.

One, the law says they do.

Two, if the state legislatures can't take back their authority from the people to decide how electors are selected.....then that authority is not longer the State Legislatures for that election. That authority is possessed by the people who voted.

Where is that written, douchebag? The state legislature always has the authority. That's what the Constitution says. You're living in a fantasy land.

The decider.....is the body that possesses the authority. Not the body from which the authority was derived.

Otherwise, by your own argument.....the State Legislatures aren't the deciders, the constitution is. As they derive their authority from the Constitution. And since the authority of the Constitution is derived from the consent of the governed.....its the people from which the constitution derives its authority.

With the people, yet again, being the deciders......by your own logic. And certainly by mine.

You're a true idiot.

Read back through the debate for us both addressing that exact issue.

Catch up, then join us.

You addressed nothing. You proved that your an idiot. Only the legislature has authority to make election law. That's what the Constitution says.

And once they've made those laws, do the State Legislatures have to abide them?

They can change the law whenever they like

Sure a state can change it's laws. Governors can veto the change. They cannot switch electors after Dec. 8th.

More to the point they can't end-around their own laws that were in place when the election was held. Not without a time machine. That's banana republic-level chicanery. The very idea is absurd.